Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Open Space Protection topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge city not to remove open‑space deed protections for Polo Fields; allege overuse by Surf Cup Sports
Summary
Multiple residents and environmental advocates told council on July 22 that Surf Cup Sports’ commercial use of the former polo fields violates grant‑deed restrictions and threatens the San Dieguito River Valley’s sensitive habitat; speakers asked the council to oppose any action that would gut the deed protections.
Dozens of San Diegans used non‑agenda public comment on July 22 to press the City Council to preserve long‑standing grant‑deed restrictions for the former Polo Fields (now used by Surf Cup Sports) and to oppose any council action that would ease protections on that open‑space parcel.
Speakers from community groups and adjacent neighborhoods described decades of documented restrictions on the land’s use and warned that removing protections would set a dangerous precedent for open space across the city. Christina Leiva of the Friends of the San Dieguito River Valley said city moves to remove restrictions had "profound implications for open space preserves" and characterized proposed actions as a betrayal of public trust.
Polly Wheatley and other neighbors described heavy commercialization of the site — intense use, nonstop whistles, dust and traffic — and urged the council to keep the grant deed intact. Residents said the site sits in a FEMA high‑risk flood zone and contains habitat listed in state data sources; they urged robust review and enforcement rather than easing restrictions for commercial expansion.
City staff indicated related items were coming to council in future agendas; the public comments on July 22 did not produce a council vote, but several speakers said they planned legal action and demanded transparency if staff recommended removing deed conditions.
What’s next: community groups said they will monitor future agenda items and pursue legal remedies if the city advances changes that they say would remove deed protections.
